Cyber Monday 2024! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

Salesforce Exam MuleSoft Integration Architect I Topic 9 Question 13 Discussion

Actual exam question for Salesforce's MuleSoft Integration Architect I exam
Question #: 13
Topic #: 9
[All MuleSoft Integration Architect I Questions]

A retail company is implementing a MuleSoft API to get inventory details from two vendors by Invoking each vendor's online applications. Due to network issues, the invocations to the vendor applications are timing out intermittently, but the requests are successful after re-invoking each

What is the most performant way of implementing the API to invoke each vendor application and to retry invocations that generate timeout errors?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Trinidad at Aug 25, 2024, 01:32 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium MuleSoft Integration Architect I Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel
Sophia
3 months ago
Option A seems a bit outdated. Invoking in series? What is this, the 90s? I'm definitely picking one of the parallel execution options. B or C, decisions decisions...
upvoted 0 times
...
Noel
3 months ago
Hmm, I'm torn between B and C. Maybe I should just roll a dice to decide. Or better yet, let's use a Round-Robin approach - that way, the vendors don't feel left out!
upvoted 0 times
Avery
2 months ago
Good point. Maybe we can combine the Round-Robin approach with a Try-Catch scope for retrying requests that timeout.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hillary
2 months ago
But what about the retry mechanism for timeout errors? Maybe we should consider that as well.
upvoted 0 times
...
Aja
2 months ago
Yeah, Round-Robin sounds like a balanced approach. It ensures both vendors get equal opportunities.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edna
2 months ago
I think using a Round-Robin approach could be a good idea. It's fair to both vendors.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Son
3 months ago
I prefer option D because it uses Round-Robin to evenly distribute requests and Try-Catch for retrying errors.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elenor
3 months ago
But option A ensures that requests are retried until successful, which is crucial for reliability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Refugia
3 months ago
I disagree, I believe option C is more performant as it uses Scatter-Gather to invoke vendors in parallel.
upvoted 0 times
...
Taryn
3 months ago
I'm going to go with Option C. Scatter-Gather with Until-Successful in each route seems more scalable and efficient than the other options.
upvoted 0 times
Nettie
2 months ago
I agree, Option C seems like the most efficient way to handle the timeouts and retry requests.
upvoted 0 times
...
India
3 months ago
Option C sounds like a good choice. Scatter-Gather with Until-Successful in each route seems like a reliable solution.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Lucille
4 months ago
Option B looks good to me. Using a Choice scope to invoke each vendor on a separate route and retrying with Until-Successful seems like a solid approach.
upvoted 0 times
Eun
3 months ago
Absolutely, a structured approach like this can help in maintaining the stability and performance of the API implementation.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pamella
3 months ago
That makes sense. It's important to handle timeout errors gracefully and ensure the requests are successful in the end.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorothy
3 months ago
I agree, having separate routes for each vendor application can help isolate any issues and retrying with Until-Successful ensures reliability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Erasmo
3 months ago
Option B looks good to me. Using a Choice scope to invoke each vendor on a separate route and retrying with Until-Successful seems like a solid approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Elenor
4 months ago
I think option A is the best choice because it invokes the vendors in series and retries timeout errors.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel